The Official Secrets Act was introduced in 1888, as a result of the acquittal of a chap called Charles Marvin. Marvin worked at the FO & was prosecuted under the larceny Act for the theft of a Government Document.

The details of this document were leaked to newspaper but the case collapsed againt Marvin at Bow Street when he had showed that he had not stolen anything but memorized the entire text of the document.

The prosecution recognised he phenomenal memory and withdrew it prosecution.!!!

Not sure how the introduction of the OSA and a loop-hole in a different law which was exploited are relevant other than for chronological reasons.

The OSA was brought in to stop a loop-hole in the previous being used again. He did not 'get around' the OSA as it wasn't even in use at the time.

The OSA does not specify that to breach the act you have to have taken documents etc, just that by imparting information you have been privy to whilst under the act (written, spoken, memorised, whatever) you are in breach.

Please tell me you're not a serving police officer if a mere stacker can see that point of law?

Not sure how the introduction of the OSA and a loop-hole in a different law which was exploited are relevant other than for chronological reasons.

The OSA was brought in to stop a loop-hole in the previous being used again. He did not 'get around' the OSA as it wasn't even in use at the time.

The OSA does not specify that to breach the act you have to have taken documents etc, just that by imparting information you have been privy to whilst under the act (written, spoken, memorised, whatever) you are in breach.

Please tell me you're not a serving police officer if a mere stacker can see that point of law?

Click to expand...

The point of law comment was a bit of banter. It would be an odd judicial system if one made a point of an Act that was not law at the time!